Clear up confusion about tongues!

[awaken]

So again, do you or do you not believe that prophets and apostles continue today?

I am not asking if you met one. I am not asking if you belong to a Charismatic church. I am asking whether or not you believe in the continuing servant gifts of prophets and apostles.

Second, can you find just one self-proclaimed prophet or apostle that has past the Biblical tests for prophet and/or Biblical qualifications for apostle?

I believe as I have post in an earlier post!

I was raised with the teachings that they do not exist today! But I was also raised that the gifts cease too!

I am trying to be as honest as I can....I do not see where the office of apostle and prophet have ceased. I have not studied it out as much as I have tongues. Maybe you can start another thread on that.

 

[annsni]

Ok, again I ask...if the Spirit prays God's perfect will (which He does) without our voice, why do we even open our mouth?

Opening our mouth isn't necessary.

 

[awaken]

1 Cor. 14:2 is about SPEAKING in tongues in general. If you can SPEAK in tongues then you can SING in tongues because singing is SPEAKING and if you can SPEAK in tongues you can give a BLESSING in tongues because giving a verbal BLESSING is SPEAKING. 1 Cor. 14:2 says nothing about "praying" either but it is included because if you can SPEAK in tongues you can do it any way speaking is done.

Find me a scripture that shows speaking in tongues other than speaking to God.

No it does not say that. It simply describes in what manner one is speaking in tongues - prayer as in verse 16 it describes another manner one is speaking in tongues - singing. You just as well says "tongues" is singing with my spirit as to say "tongues" is praying with my spirit. Neither is true as you can sing and pray with your spirit in your ordinary normal langauage also and Christians do it every day!

There is no PRIVAE praying or singing in tongue here either but there are LISTENERS present (v. 17). I do sing to God in tongues! TONGUES IS TALKING TO GOD. When we sing in English to worship are we not singing to God!

It says nothing about "we" but "I" and what Paul determined how he would use tongues and he would not use it without understanding.

In the assembly...that is the context of his correction!

No he is not! He is saying that only when tongues does not accompany understanding that only God understands as none hearing you understand but you are speaking INTO THE AIR. In addition, if they are speaking in tongues and the speaker does not understand it is "unfruitful" and it is something Paul "WILL" not do because it is impossible for self-edification without understanding.

You again are missing the positive side of his correction.

Do you correct your kids without also explaining the right?

No he did not call "praying with my spirit" tongues any more than he called "singing" with my spirit tongues. Both can be an activity of "my spirit" among MANY OTHER THINGS that have nothing to do with tongues.

I like Paul's explanation not yours.

"So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind." (1 Corinthians 14:15)
Two ways of praying and singing!

Yes, he condmens one and says he "WILL" not do it and approves the other. That is the distinction between right and wrong.

He tells them if they do not have the interpretation to be quiet in the church.. let it be between you and God. I would call that private conversation between me and God...PRAYER!

If you do understand the difference then you are intentionally perverting Jude's words who says not one thing about tongues and you have no right or basis to assume he is talking about tongues UNLESS you really do not understand the difference and believe the phrase "in the Spirit" in connection with prayer always refers to tongue speaking.

Again, I am letting scripture interprete scripture.

Again 1 Cor. 14:15-17 says no such thing! Look, Singing in my spirit is not praying in tongues any more than praying with my spirit IS praying in tongues as both are merely things that the human spirit does AMONG MANY OTHER THINGS that have no reference to praying in tongues. You can "groan" in the Spirit as Jesus did and yet no tongues. You can "rejoice" in your spirit as Jesus did and many others and yet NO TONGUES.

I agree that praying and singing in the spirit is different..but they are both directed to God. Paul shows us the difference when he says "praying with the spirit" and "with our understanding"

Sure you can pray in tongues "in my spirit" or "with my spirit" but you can also "sing" in tongues "in my spirit" or "with my spirit" as much as you can "rejoice....grieve" or be convicted "in my spirit" and yet NO TONGUES. So to pray in tongues "in my spirit" is just one of many various activities of what one can do "with my spirit."

I am just showing what Paul called tongues in vs. 14..."For if I pray in an tongue, my spirit prayeth..."

 

[awaken]

Here you clearly contradict yourself.

Either believers speak with tongues

Or they are not believers

Which is it?

We have to work out our own salvation.
If we are taught tongues do not exist how can we manifest them?
I was saved for years and never spoke in tongue, why? Because I was taught against them. I was in unbelief. Does that mean I could not, no!

What I am saying is if we do not understand a certain promise of God, how can we walk in it? Does that mean God did not promise it? NO! We just chose not to believe it and walk in it!
Does that change the fact that we are saved? NO! I was saved long before I came across this truth. I was in ignorance because the way I was taught by man!

 

[awaken]

Finish the context! He is not talking about the future coming of Christ but until the present members are matured in the faith so they won't be tossed to and fro with every wind of doctrine. It is unifying the members of a local body of baptized beleivers in "the faith" once delivered he is speaking about. Apostles and prophets provided the written word. Pastor's and teachers use it for that end.

First off others than the apostles provided books in the written Word (But that is another thread).
I do not see us in unity?? Even on this board...believers are not in unity! God is still callling out His bride! It is not complete! We have not reached the fullness of Christ!

Again, you are purposely side stepping the questions. Do you or do you not beleive that prophets and apostles are for today equally as sign gifts?

Mark 16 is direclty addressed to apostles and their followers and viewed by Mark as a fulfilled prophech as He says they (apostles) did go forth and those things did follow. He never said they went forth and they ARE following us.

I have answered this! More than the apostles spoke in tongues!

You don't have to meet one to test them. They have their prophecies all over the internet and you can test their prophecies by the Biblical tests for a prophet.

Start a thread on apostles! Maybe you can teach me something! But I have made my stand clear on this!

 

[awaken]

Obviously we are not going to agree with each other. Hence, we can drop this discussion and turn to something else or we can continue. That is up to you.

I have to drop it temporarily and go do some shopping.

Don't mistake my matter of fact confrontation style to be a dislike for you as a person or disrespect for your person. I do disrepect your doctrine and interpretations but I have no ill will against you personally.

Thank you for the kind words! I also feel the same way!
I do not mind someone challenging me on my belief! I hold no resentment to you are anyone else.

I have changed many of my beliefs because someone challenged me on them and proved me wrong in scriputures.

But once you have experienced what the word says! I do not think anyone can change your mind! Just like salvation..once you know our Lord and have experience Him in your life..no one can convince you that you are not saved. (even though the devil tries)

 

[awaken]

Opening our mouth isn't necessary.

True! But why pray silently...if the Holy Spirit can pray His perfect will? Just something to think about?

 

[awaken]

The answer is in the text. Because we do not know many times what we really need and He does and he can do it without tongues being uttered by us.

Well tongues is the same way! It is by our most HOly faith...trusting as we pray what the Holy Spirit gives us to.

I do not always know God's will, but if the Holy Spirit can pray through me..whether I understand it or not..God's perfect will...then I surrender my voice to Him. Whether it is in English or a language I do not understand! I trust the Holy Spirit!

 

[Yeshua1]

If any have the natural mind are speaking foolishness it is those speaking in tongues today. Paul never encouraged the speaking of tongues--not once. No one was ever commanded to "seek" to speak in tongues.

The tongues that are spoken today are not "sacred" but vile. They are not Biblical but anti-biblical. They have no Biblical reason or basis to be spoken, and most of all they are not "tongues" or languages at all. If you speak in "tongues" then please tell me what languages the Lord has miraculously given to you to speak in? What are they? Who has translated for you? What did he say they were? Surely someone recognized them, or they are of no value whatsoever. For Paul's entire emphasis in 1Cor.14 was on understanding. If one could not be understood, then it was all vanity.

Speaking in tongues, the phenomena you see today, is not a tradition. It is an ungodly practice that started up in 1905, that had not been practiced before that time for 1900 years. One can hardly call that a tradition. It is a doctrine that goes straight against the Bible.

It was only "important" in the first century when revelation was still needed. Now that revelation is complete we don't need revelatory gifts any longer (mentioned in 1Cor.13:8). As promised they would all cease, and they did, when the Bible was completed with the completion of the Book of Revelation near the end of the first century.

Obviously it is more important to some than to others.
It is important because it is a doctrine that is deceiving many.

That doesn't mean that they are all available now either. How many people do you see that can heal thousands like Peter did in Acts 5:16? They were all healed--no exceptions.

The Word of God tells us what those changes were. They weren't the gifts of the Holy Spirit. The major change was that believers became to be indwelt by the Holy Spirit on the day of their salvation.

Tongues in NT were either a sign to the jews that God has indeed sent forth the messiah, jesus, and the Apsotles with the truth of the Gospel...

or they were used by the NT prophets in local assemblies to confirm message of the Apsotles as from god, but in either case, NOT for today required!

 

[The Biblicist]

Find me a scripture that shows speaking in tongues other than speaking to God.

Isaiah 28:11-15; 1 Cor. 14:20-23. Again you are misinterpreting 1 Cor. 14:2.

2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

What is he doing? He "speaketh in an unknown tongue" and he is doing it in a church context.

Why is it unknown to men but only known to God? "for no man understandeth him" Correct?

Why does no man understand him? Because he is not providing any interpretation but is as one speaking into the air like a Barbarian without distinction or clarification of sounds! If he provides interpetation then all men in the sound of his voice do understand him! Correct? But here he is dealing with those who do not provide any interpretation. Do you get it?

So what is Pauls admonition in 1 Cor. 14:3-13???? Speak in the church so that men do understand you and that requires asking God for an interpretation so that you understand what you are saying or else you cannot tell others what you are saying (v. 14).

Will Paul pray or sing in tongues without "understanding" so that his prayer is being directed by his spirit without his mind? (v. 15)? NO! He "will" not do that (v. 16).

Will Paul pray or sing with understanding but not give understanding of what he is saying to those listening (v. 17). NO! He "will" not do that!

So the only tongues where God understands and listeners do not understand is IN THE CHURCH when it is USED WRONGLY! IN the church the ONLY proper use of tongues is with understanding by both speaker and listener. But in the Church he would rather speak five words than five thousand words in tongues that no one can understand.

However, the church is not the place God designed tongues for and neither did God design tongues to speak to God (vv. 20-23) as that kind of thinking is immature (v. 20). God designed tongues for MEN TO HEAR - the JEWS (v. 21). He did not design tongues for BELIEVERS TO HEAR (v. 22) nor did he design tongues for GENTILE unbelievers to hear as they are "unlearned" and will not perceive it as a "sign" but rather that you are sick or mad!

 

[awaken]

Tongues in NT were either a sign to the jews that God has indeed sent forth the messiah, jesus, and the Apsotles with the truth of the Gospel...

or they were used by the NT prophets in local assemblies to confirm message of the Apsotles as from god, but in either case, NOT for today required!

And you base your belief on what scripture?

 

[The Biblicist]

In the assembly...that is the context of his correction!

Thank you for finally admitting that 1 Cor. 14:15-17 is not a PRIVATE setting but in the church context. Thank you! Now be consistent with that admission with your interpretation of verses 15-17. Thus far you have argued that this was a PRIVATE setting OUTSIDE the church but verse 17 makes it obvious that it is not a PRIVATE but a PUBLIC setting in the church.

So what shall I do? I will pray with my spirit, but I will also pray with my mind; I will sing with my spirit, but I will also sing with my mind." (1 Corinthians 14:15)
Two ways of praying and singing!

Lets get into this text! Consider the words "so what shall I do?" Why does he say that? He says it because he has been considering an "IF" or HYPOTHETICAL situation in verse 14. So what shall I do in regard to that hypothetical consideration in verse 14. Shall I speak in tongues without understanding? Shall I do that? Shall I do what is considered in verse 2 where none understand but God? Shall I speak "into the air"? Shall I speak where not only I am a "barbarian" to others but to MYSELF as well? What shall I do in regard to that scenario???? Do you see what he is considering?

Now look at his answer; "I WILL pray with my spirit, BUT I WILL also pray with my mind". "I WILL sing with my spirit but I WILL also sing with my mind." What is that? That is the reverse of what he hypothetically considered in verse 14. That means when he speaks in tongues whether by praying or singing he will not do what is described in verses 2-11. He will not speak where he does not understand what he is saying. He will only speak in tongues when he knows what he himself is saying - PERIOD!

That is not all! Even if he does understand what he is saying, he will not speak or sing or pray in tongues WITHOUT GIVING THAT UNDERSTANDING TO ALL THE LISTENERS.

So what does prayer "with my mind" mean? It means I UNDERSTAND WHAT I AM SAYING in tongues.

So what does prayer or singing "with my spirit" mean? It means IN THIS CONTEXT that the gift of tongues comes from my own spirit that by passes the mind and so comes WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING.

What is he saying then? He is saying that he will not speak in the church when it comes ONLY THAT WAY as it is fruitless to himself and to others (vv. 18-19).

He is saying that OUTSIDE THE CHURCH (vv. 20-23) there is no need for interpretation because it is designed for those who need no interpretation because they understand it in their own native tongue as a "sign" from God (Acts 2:6-11). He is saying it is not designed by God for "believers" or for lost gentiles "unlearned" unbelievers.

 

[Revmitchell]

Since when is it your business to moderate? Why don't you mind your own business instead and I will mind mine? There is a difference between an accusation and a fact and what I stated was a fact. If you don't like that fact then stop reading my posts and mind your own business.

You engaged me I did not engage you. Be careful what you ask for.

 

[The Biblicist]

He tells them if they do not have the interpretation to be quiet in the church.. let it be between you and God. I would call that private conversation between me and God...PRAYER!

28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.

Look at the context of this statement. It is public speaking in the church. In verse 2 he describes what happens when you do speak publiclly in the church without interpetation. No one understands but God.

Second, he directs them to pray for understanding. This prayer is not in tongues but it is a prayer that they do understand and is directed by the mind specifically for understanding of what they are saying in tongues. If no understanding is given them then "what shall I do?" I shall BE QUIET - I shall not speak in tongues. Hence AUDIBLE SPEAKING is SILENCED!

Now if this is how you want to experience tongues in SILENCE then fine, because only God can understand whats happening in your spirit.

 

[The Biblicist]

You engaged me I did not engage you. Be careful what you ask for.

I never addressed you! Your own post points to what I said to Awaken not to you! I have no idea what you are talking about!

 

[The Biblicist]

Thank you for the kind words! I also feel the same way!
I do not mind someone challenging me on my belief! I hold no resentment to you are anyone else.

I have changed many of my beliefs because someone challenged me on them and proved me wrong in scriputures.

But once you have experienced what the word says! I do not think anyone can change your mind! Just like salvation..once you know our Lord and have experience Him in your life..no one can convince you that you are not saved. (even though the devil tries)

I will give you cudo's for at least attempting to base and defend your beliefs on scripture and its context. Most Charismatics place scripture on a lower level and subject to their own experience instead of what the Scriptures command (Isa. 8:20).

I had a friend in Kentuck that was a tongue speaking slain in the Spirit baptized in the Spirit pentecostal who visited our church after coming from a hot night tongue speaking. Two weeks later he was saved and baptized into our congregation and never spoke in tongues again!

 

[awaken]

Isaiah 28:11-15; 1 Cor. 14:20-23. Again you are misinterpreting 1 Cor. 14:2.

2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

What is he doing? He "speaketh in an unknown tongue" and he is doing it in a church context.

Why is it unknown to men but only known to God? "for no man understandeth him" Correct?

Correct, no one understands him unless God gives the interpretation.

Why does no man understand him? Because he is not providing any interpretation but is as one speaking into the air like a Barbarian without distinction or clarification of sounds! If he provides interpetation then all men in the sound of his voice do understand him! Correct? But here he is dealing with those who do not provide any interpretation. Do you get it?

I will agree that tongues without interpretation does not edify the church.

So what is Pauls admonition in 1 Cor. 14:3-13???? Speak in the church so that men do understand you and that requires asking God for an interpretation so that you understand what you are saying or else you cannot tell others what you are saying (v. 14).

Again, I agree that the correction is not to speak in the assembly without an interpretation.

Will Paul pray or sing in tongues without "understanding" so that his prayer is being directed by his spirit without his mind? (v. 15)? NO! He "will" not do that (v. 16).

He will do as he as intructed others...he will not speak in tongues in the assembly without an interpretation.

Will Paul pray or sing with understanding but not give understanding of what he is saying to those listening (v. 17). NO! He "will" not do that!

I agree that Paul in the assembly will not speak in tongues without an interpretation. YOu seem to be saying the same thing over and over...

So the only tongues where God understands and listeners do not understand is IN THE CHURCH when it is USED WRONGLY! IN the church the ONLY proper use of tongues is with understanding by both speaker and listener. But in the Church he would rather speak five words than five thousand words in tongues that no one can understand.

I agree that God understands what they are saying and the listeners do not, unless there is an interpretation.
It does not say the speaker has to understand what he is saying. As a matter of fact he says in vs 13 that he does not understand what he is saying. Why else would he have to pray for an interpretation?

However, the church is not the place God designed tongues for and neither did God design tongues to speak to God (vv. 20-23) as that kind of thinking is immature (v. 20). God designed tongues for MEN TO HEAR - the JEWS (v. 21). He did not design tongues for BELIEVERS TO HEAR (v. 22) nor did he design tongues for GENTILE unbelievers to hear as they are "unlearned" and will not perceive it as a "sign" but rather that you are sick or mad!

This I disagree with! Tongues with the interpretation is allowed in the church.
Tongues are speaking to God.
Paul says in vs. 2 it is speaking to God.
Paul says in vs. 14 it is praying with the spirit (praying is talking to God).
Paul says in vs. 17 tongues gives thanks well (thanking God is talking to God).
Paul says in vs. if there is no interpreter to keep silent and talk to God.

Tongues manifested by the Holy Spirit is speaking to God not man. Yes, it is a sign to unbelievers. vs. 22 says. "Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe (believers do not need a sign, they already believe), but to them that believe not (unbelievers)"

I do not see where they are not for Gentiles.
I thought Corinthians was a mixed church? ... they spoke in tongues.
1 Cor. 10 were Gentiles and they spoke in tongues.
It does not say Gentile unlearned (unlearned could be anyone that does not know the gospel) in vs. 23. You added Gentiles to your reasoning.

 

[The Biblicist]

Correct, no one understands him unless God gives the interpretation.

I will agree that tongues without interpretation does not edify the church.

Again, I agree that the correction is not to speak in the assembly without an interpretation.

He will do as he as intructed others...he will not speak in tongues in the assembly without an interpretation.

I agree that Paul in the assembly will not speak in tongues without an interpretation. YOu seem to be saying the same thing over and over...


I agree that God understands what they are saying and the listeners do not, unless there is an interpretation.

Up to this point you were doing good EXCEPT for one important detail. You would not admit that verse 2 and "speak unto God" is QUALIFIED BY THE CONTEXT of speaking without interpretation! Instead you JERK IT OUT of that context, separated from this context and attempt to interpret it to mean that speaking in tongues in general regardless of context is "unto God" period. If you interpret "unto God" by its specific contextual explanation you could never reinterpret that phrase from its contextual meaning!

So put it back in its context where its meaning is QUALIFIED BY THE CONTEXT to mean tongues spoken without an interpreter is "unto God" rather than tongues in general is "unto God." You have no contextual right to define verse 2 to mean that.

 

[The Biblicist]

It does not say the speaker has to understand what he is saying. As a matter of fact he says in vs 13 that he does not understand what he is saying. Why else would he have to pray for an interpretation?

In another post I went over verses 14-17 in detail. Did you read it! If you had you would have never responded the way you did above becuase you are wrong.

Verse 14 provides a HYPOTHETICAL "IF" scenario:

14 For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
15 ¶ What is it then?

See the "IF" and see the following question "What is it then" or as your translation put it "What shall I do then?".

He is still considering the issue of verse 2-11 where tongues is WITHOUT interpretation and thus without understanding by both speaker and hearer but is merely speaking "into the air" like a "barbarian" to himself and to others. Is that what he should do? Verse 15 answers that hypothetical use of tongues and the question in verse 14. Verse 15 tells you what Paul would do and it is contrary to what had been described in verses 2-11.

Paul will not speak in tongues in the church "with my spirit" UNLESS and EXCEPT he himself understands it and is thus able to impart that understanding to others - PERIOD!

Tongues are speaking to God.

ONLY in the context of NO UNDERSTANDING AND NO INTERPRETATION - period! This the clear QUALIFICATION provided for those words in this context.

Paul says in vs. 2 it is speaking to God.

IN CONTEXT OF NO UNDERSTANDING AND THUS NO INTEPRETATION.

Paul says in vs. 14 it is praying with the spirit (praying is talking to God).

All prayer is talking to God but not all speaking in tongues or singing in tongues is talking to God.

Paul says in vs. 17 tongues gives thanks well (thanking God is talking to God).

That is qualified by first asking God for interpretation so that you can even discern you are giving thanks and not really making intercession for others or supplications for yourself! That is qualified by understanding with you mind what you are doing but not sharing it with the listeners.

Tongues manifested by the Holy Spirit is speaking to God not man.

You skip verses 20-21! Why? I wil tell you why because if you go read what Paul is quoting it is plain as the nose on your face that God designed and predicted "tongues" to be a "sign" to the Jews that they MIGHT BELIEVE in Christ! However, that does not fit your forced interpretation that it is designed only to God and so you skip it!

Yes, it is a sign to unbelievers. vs. 22

How can that be if it is ONLY "unto God" period! The scripture contradicts your conclusion and your admission contradicts your forced conclusion.

I do not see where they are not for Gentiles.

Of course you don't because you SKIP verses 20-21 and you refuse to go read Isaiah 28:11-15 where Paul quotes this from. Paul gives you the BIBLICAL design and reason for tongues but you refuse to accept it. You simply jerk words here and there out of this context where the context QUALIFIES those words to mean something entirely different than your forced conclusions. Presto- you have invented your own doctrine.

 

[awaken]

Thank you for finally admitting that 1 Cor. 14:15-17 is not a PRIVATE setting but in the church context. Thank you! Now be consistent with that admission with your interpretation of verses 15-17. Thus far you have argued that this was a PRIVATE setting OUTSIDE the church but verse 17 makes it obvious that it is not a PRIVATE but a PUBLIC setting in the church.

I have never said the correction was a private correction or that 1 Corinthians was not addressing the church.
Paul was correcting the church, I have never denied that. I said tongues was speaking to God. We can speak to God outside the church.

Lets get into this text! Consider the words "so what shall I do?" Why does he say that? He says it because he has been considering an "IF" or HYPOTHETICAL situation in verse 14. So what shall I do in regard to that hypothetical consideration in verse 14. Shall I speak in tongues without understanding? Shall I do that? Shall I do what is considered in verse 2 where none understand but God? Shall I speak "into the air"? Shall I speak where not only I am a "barbarian" to others but to MYSELF as well? What shall I do in regard to that scenario???? Do you see what he is considering?

I see his "if" just as it is written. If he does speak in tongues (which he has already said he does in vs. 18). Not that "if" as if he never will.

Now look at his answer; "I WILL pray with my spirit, BUT I WILL also pray with my mind". "I WILL sing with my spirit but I WILL also sing with my mind." What is that? That is the reverse of what he hypothetically considered in verse 14. That means when he speaks in tongues whether by praying or singing he will not do what is described in verses 2-11. He will not speak where he does not understand what he is saying. He will only speak in tongues when he knows what he himself is saying - PERIOD! [/quote] No, he said only if he interpretes so others can know what he is saying.

That is not all! Even if he does understand what he is saying, he will not speak or sing or pray in tongues WITHOUT GIVING THAT UNDERSTANDING TO ALL THE LISTENERS.

It does not say even if he does...He is plain in the chapter that no tongues in the assembly without the interpretation. It still boils down to correction within the assembly.

So what does prayer "with my mind" mean? It means I UNDERSTAND WHAT I AM SAYING in tongues.

No, it means pray both ways. Just like it said in previous verses. If you pray in tongues..pray ALSO with the understanding. So that others can agree (say amen) with you. Again, it boils down to tongues and interpretation in the assembly.

So what does prayer or singing "with my spirit" mean? It means IN THIS CONTEXT that the gift of tongues comes from my own spirit that by passes the mind and so comes WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING.

Wow! I agree! Tongues bypasses the mind
Paul did not say "I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding at the same time." He could not say this, because these two types of prayer are mutually exclusive: either you use your mind, and pray in your learned language, or you use your spirit man, and your mind is bypassed. Therefore, what Paul is saying here is that he will pray both ways, but not both ways at the same time, which would be impossible. This is what Paul is saying, look at how he started his discussion:

2 For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

Paul starts out his teaching with the fact that a prayer in tongues is a prayer in the spirit, and "no man understands." This would include the prayer or speaker in tongues. What is he praying? He is praying mysteries. Why mysteries? Because "no man understands."

What is he saying then? He is saying that he will not speak in the church when it comes ONLY THAT WAY as it is fruitless to himself and to others (vv. 18-19).

Again, I agree with Paul. Tongues should not be spoken in the church without interpretation. If there is no interpretation then he should pray to God and himself as vs. 28 says.

He is saying that OUTSIDE THE CHURCH (vv. 20-23) there is no need for interpretation because it is designed for those who need no interpretation because they understand it in their own native tongue as a "sign" from God (Acts 2:6-11). He is saying it is not designed by God for "believers" or for lost gentiles "unlearned" unbelievers.

Again, I do not understand how you come up with that. Nowhere does it say speaking to God can not be done at home. Especially, in vs. 28 where it tells you to talk to God and keep silent in the church.